Self Evaluation

PART 1:

1. My piece's style drifted from my mentor artist, Andy Warhol, simply because I decided to use black and white on purple backgrounds instead of bright colors on the solid backgrounds. I was able to create two pieces, which Andy Warhol did, but I didn't finish all four as I was hoping to.

2. Inspiration is when an idea is sparked in your own mind from another's original thought or work. Imitation is simply copying a photo or piece of work, not altering it in any way, or giving it your own personal flair.

PART 2:

Art is often glanced over and seen as "good" or "bad" based on the sheer talent of an artist and his drawing ability. For me this is a large portion of what I evaluate pieces on, but I also look beyond the shill level. I love seeing detail because it shows that lots of time was spent on the project. A 5 minute piece is considered art, but to me not as powerful as one that has been slaved over for hours. I also believe that the main idea of the artwork is crucial as it establishes the tone for the entire piece before it is even begun.

PART 3:

1. To me, 1000 hours of staring” by Tom Friedman is not art. It is a blank canvas. The artist didn't create it, it came like that, and the meaning behind it is vague.

2. The Sistine Chapel is considered the epitome of art. The thing that usually strike people is the amount of time Michelangelo spent on this piece. Because of the detail and skill level, this piece is definitely art based on my criteria.

3. The mixture of photography and literature in The Bowery in Two Inadequate Descriptive Systems by Martha Rossler makes the piece art. I believe art is not only paintings, but also writing, photography, and music.

4. Looking at the piece many people would say "I can do that", but the fact of the matter is, nobody until Jackson Pollock did this. I think that this is art because Pollock invented a whole new style of painting.

5. I think that Sol le Witt's wall drawings of geometric shapes can be considered "artsy", but not art, simply because to me it looks too much like playful wallpaper. It is definitely creative, but I do not see the emotion or meaning behind it, and I do not see it as an original style of art either.